1 (5)

Uppgjord - Prepared Faktaansvarig - Subject responsible Nr - No.

EPL/T/RP Heikkil/Nordlund
Dokansv/Godk - Doc respons/Approved Kontr - Checked Datum - Date

EPL/T/R 99:092
Rev File

EPL/T/RPC

99-05-05

tr_99_092=sqi_to_mos.fm

Information copy: EPL/T/RP EPL/T/RC EPL/TMC EPL/T/TX EPL/T/TX EPL/T/MP ERA/T/VC ERA/LVN/DPC All Tor Bjrn Minde Kari Korkala Niclas Hugosson Roger Bystrm Robert Jonsson Hans Hermansson Anders Carlsson

Distribution: ERA/LVR/PR Saeed Yousefi

Conversion between SQI and MOS

Summary
The scale chosen for the SQI measure is based on the MNRU standard [1], and expressed in dBQ. The reason for this choice is discussed in [2]. In some cases, however, it might still be preferrable to use a MOS-like scale, e.g. for comparison with other five-grade based rating methods [3]. This document describes one possible conversion which can be applied so that the resulting SQI scores are expressed in a scale comparable to a MOS scale.

2 (5)
Nr - No.

EPL/T/R 99:092
Datum - Date Rev File

1999-05-05

tr_99_092=sqi_to_mos.fm

Conversion Curves
Figure 1 below shows the dBQ-to-MOS relation for three different subjective tests. The relations can be computed since all three tests include MNRU samples which are also rated. By making a regression over these samples the curves can be found. The intuitive approach would be to select one of these curves and use it for the conversion. However, such a method will actually produce a biased conversion (the predicted MOS values will be too low). The reason for this is described below, together with a correct conversion method.

alld

GSM Interoperability Is136 Evaluation Floating Point IS641

3 MOS 2 1 0 20 10 0 10 dBQ 20 30 40

Figure 1

Regression curves from three different MOS tests.

One of the benefits with the dBQ scale is that it does not saturate, while the MOS scale does saturate, especially in the low-quality region. To be able to exploit this non-saturation feature of the dBQ scale, the rating procedure used when the SQI measure was developed could not be a simple MOS test, for obvious reasons. Even if another MOS scale; MOSLE (MOS Listening Effort) would be possible to use in the low-quality region, the merging of the two MOS scales would still pose a problem. The approach chosen for the SQI listenings was to perform comparative tests (A-B test) where the listener is to judge which of two samples are the best one. In this way it was possible to compare MNRU samples with recorded real-life samples and thus finding the dBQ score for each recorded sample.

3 (5)
Nr - No.

EPL/T/R 99:092
Datum - Date Rev File

1999-05-05

tr_99_092=sqi_to_mos.fm

The effect of this listening method is that at the high-quality region the goodness (or the quality) of the samples are compared, while at the low-quality region the badness (or the ease of understanding) are compared. This gives a seamless transition between different perceptual ways of comparing, enabling the full usage of the dBQ scale. Since effectively two scales (comparable to MOSQ and MOSLE) are used, the relation between dBQ and only one of the scales, MOSQ, will differ from the corresponding curves regressed from a normal MOS test (as those shown in figure 1). This is most evident at medium to low quality levels. By performing a MOS test on real-life recorded material, and comparing the results with the corresponding SQI values, a correct curve (figure 2) can be obtained. Note that this is only one possible curve, since the shape of the curve will differ sligthly depending on the setup of the MOS test. By comparing this curve with the ones in figure 1 the difference in the lower quality regions is obvious. The implication of this is that when an A-B test method is used together with MNRU samples, the listener does accept slightly worse MNRU conditions than during a MOS test (which is expected due to the low-end saturation problem in a MOS test).

conversion

MOSQ

20

15

10

5 SQI

10

15

20

25

30

Figure 2

Conversion curve between SQI and a MOS-like scale.

Even if the curve above is only one possible example of a conversion, the basic shape of the curve is expected to be approximately the same for other variants of the curve. As with all MOS-like measures, comparisons of absolute levels between different rating methods should not

4 (5)
Nr - No.

EPL/T/R 99:092
Datum - Date Rev File

1999-05-05

tr_99_092=sqi_to_mos.fm

be done. However, by using the conversion curve, relative performance metrics (e.g. correlation towards subjective MOS scores) can be used.

Conversion Table
The table below contains the numerical equivalence of the curve in figure 2. By using these values a conversion between SQI and a fivegrade MOS-like scale can be obtained. SQI -20 -19 -18 -17 -16 -15 -14 -13 -12 -11 -10 -9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 MOS 1.01 1.02 1.02 1.03 1.03 1.04 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.07 1.09 1.10 1.12 1.15 1.17 1.20 1.24 1.28 1.34 1.39 1.46 1.54 1.62 1.72 1.82 1.94 2.06 2.20

5 (5)
Nr - No.

EPL/T/R 99:092
Datum - Date Rev File

1999-05-05

tr_99_092=sqi_to_mos.fm

SQI 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

MOS 2.34 2.48 2.63 2.78 2.93 3.07 3.21 3.34 3.46 3.57 3.67 3.76 3.84 3.91 3.97 4.02 4.07 4.11 4.15 4.17 4.20 4.22 4.24

References
[1] [2] [3] Modulated Noise Reference Unit; ITU-T P.810. TEMS SQI and MOS; Gunnar Heikkil; OSQAR/AJ-013. Methods for Subjective Determination of Transmission Quality; ITU-T P.800.